Focus

"Pro Multis." The Pope's Translation Is Gaining Support

He has ordered that it be translated "for many," instead of "for all." Against the view of the Italian bishops. But now, from none other than Italy, two scholars of the Bible and the liturgy are agreeing with Benedict XVI, although with a few distinctions

In effect, after Vatican Council II, in most of the translations of the Roman missal in the various languages "pro multis" was rendered as "for all," in a forced interpretation.

And the repeated calls from the congregation for divine worship for a more literal translation of the words of Jesus at the last supper – in the Gospels of Matthew and Mark – had been little obeyed.

In recent years, nonetheless, the new translations of the missal undertaken by some of the episcopates have restored in various countries the "for many."

This is what has happened, for example, in the United States, beginning in Advent of 2011: "for many." And the same thing is about to happen in Germany: "für Viele."

In France, the translation currently in use is: "pour la multitude."

And in Italy?

In the Italian Church, which has the pope as bishop of Rome and its primate, the episcopate has applied to the Vatican for the "recognitio," or final evaluation and authorization, of a new translation of the missal that still maintains the "per tutti."

This is, in fact, the translation desired by the overwhelming majority of Italian bishops, when in November of 2010 they were called to vote on it.

Out of 187 voters, only 11 opted for "per molti." While another 4 said that they preferred the version "per la moltitudine." Apart from one blank ballot, the remaining 171 voted to keep "per tutti." In their judgment, abandoning this translation could disorient the faithful, sowing doubts on the truth of faith that salvation is offered to all without exception.

Pope Joseph Ratzinger as well, in his letter to the German bishops, has said that he is aware of this risk. And in fact he has asked that the "for many" of the consecration be adequately explained to the faithful, preparing them for its restoration in the countries where this is about to take place, if not at the behest of the bishops then by order of the Holy See.

Italy is one of these countries.

And the new development this summer in Italy is that a thorough discussion has already begun on the translation of "pro multis," in a sometimes critical dialogue with the theses of Benedict XVI in his letter to the German bishops, but arriving at solutions that share its substance.

*

The scholars who have taken part in this discussion recently are Francesco Pieri, a priest of the diocese of Bologna and a professor of liturgy, biblical Greek, and ancient Church history, and Silvio Barbaglia, a priest of the diocese of Novara and a professor of Old and New Testament exegesis.

The former, Pieri, is about to issue a book on this topic, published by the Sacred Heart Fathers of Bologna with a preface by the theologian Severino Dianich, and has given a preview of its theses in this article in the magazine "il Regno":

Pieri criticizes Benedict XVI where he maintains – in the letter to the German bishops, but also in the second volume of his "Jesus of Nazareth" – both that there is no longer any exegetical consensus on the interpretation of 'many' as a Semitism equivalent to 'all,' and that the Eucharist has a different range of action with respect to the death of Jesus on the cross. According to the pope, in fact, "the extent of the sacrament is more limited; it reaches many, but not all." That is, it reaches the concrete celebrating community ("for you") and the Church as a whole ("for many"). The Church that in turn is called to be light and leaven of salvation "for all."

Pieri comments:

"The interpretation proposed is intriguing, but at the same time it raises a few strong reservations. First among all of these is that of separating excessively, restricting it, the Eucharistic rite from the redemptive death."

But at the moment of drawing his conclusions, Pieri finds himself once again near those upheld by Benedict XVI.

Pieri demonstrates that he shares the exegesis of the Hebrew word "rabbim" made by Albert Vanhoye, the great biblicist whom Benedict XVI made a cardinal, according to which it simply signifies "a great number," without specifying whether or not this corresponds to the whole.

And he continues:

"In the case of 'pro multis,' we maintain that there is a solution for getting closer to the letter of the formula without betraying its meaning. This is represented by the excellent translation of the French missal, 'pour la multitude,' which could be adopted without difficulty in Italian and probably also in the other Romance languages: 'per la moltitudine,' or if it were preferred, 'per una moltitudine.' Such a translation, closer to the letter of the Roman missal than the one currently in use, would help to disclose for a greater number of the faithful the very heart of that Eucharistic prayer with which for more than a millennium and a half the West has celebrated the Mass, professing its faith and nourishing its devotion."

*

By another route, the other scholar who has taken part in the discussion, Silvio Barbaglia, arrives at a proposal similar to that of Pieri.

Barbaglia published his contribution in the magazine "Fides et Ratio" of the Istituto Superiore di Scienze Religiose "Romano Guardini" of Taranto.

He confesses that he began with the intention of demonstrating the greater plausibility of the version "per voi e per tutti," but that he radically overturned this "prejudice" of his in the course of his research.

This is the complete text of his article, very careful in interweaving the analysis of the biblical texts with that of the liturgical texts:

Barbaglia shows how the adjective "molti" bears within itself an "indefinite" nature, serving to open in universal terms 'ex parte Dei' the destination of the salvific gift."

And he concludes:

"If the words of the consecration over the chalice affirm that the destination of the new and eternal covenant in his blood is identified contextually with the participants in the celebration ('per voi') and universally with many others ('per molti') whose identity is not given to us to know, because only God knows it, I believe that the most correct literal expression that renders the innovative meaning given by the liturgical redaction is: 'per voi e per moltitudini.'

"But the expression 'pro multis' could also be rendered with two terms instead of one: with a substantive that would express the idea of the multitude, accompanied by an adjective that would emphasize its 'in-definite' dimension. The adjective in the Italian language – originating in the Latin language – that best expresses all of this is 'immenso,' which signifies 'without measure': exactly the dimensions of that which is not delimited or defined. The result of the analysis conducted here would therefore be the following: 'Prendete e bevetene tutti: questo è il calice del mio sangue per la nuova ed eterna alleanza, versato per voi e per moltitudini immense, in remissione dei peccati. Fate questo in memoria di me'."

______________

This is not the first time, with this dispute over "pro multis," that the biblicist Silvio Barbaglia has challenged Benedict XVI.

In this book, Barbaglia upholds two theses. The first is that the last supper of Jesus was truly a Passover supper according to the calendar of the Jewish feasts (contrary to what Benedict XVI maintained in the second volume of his "Jesus of Nazareth"). The second is that at that last supper, Jesus decided to abstain from eating the food of the Passover: he fasted in order to be in the midst of his disciples as "he who serves."